From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c0f035b936128b6c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,c0f035b936128b6c X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Subject: Re: Ada95 to ANSI_C converter Date: 1997/04/02 Message-ID: <5htfka$vqd$1@news.nyu.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 230118352 References: <01bc3a3d$7734db20$63f482c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com> <5hfble$4d0$1@news.pacifier.com> Organization: New York University Ultracomputer Research Lab Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c Date: 1997-04-02T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <5hfble$4d0$1@news.pacifier.com> steved@pacifier.com (Steve Doiel) writes: >Has anyone done any work to make the GCC back end generate 'C' code? It >seems that this might be beneficial to all ports that use the GCC back end. No one has done this and I don't think this would be all that useful. When you consider that many front ends (specifically that for Ada) use features that aren't expressable in C (most notably discriminated records), that C that would have to be produced would correspond a lot more to an *interpreter* of the program than a compilation of it. It might be an interesting exercise to do something like this, but I don't think it would be as beneficial as you think.